posted on Jan, 19 2012 @ 10:29 AM
Originally posted by nake13
Had the Wermacht made three simple changes in their battle plan for Barbarossa,they would have neutralised the Soviets within Months,i.e Hitler
seriously underestimated the influence that Moscow exerted on the entire Soviet Union,had they made Moscow their primary objective and "cut the head
off the snake" as it were the soviet forces would have collapsed in complete chaos without objectives/directives being issued by Moscow.
I too have read Stolfi's "Hitlers panzers east' so your preaching to the choir..... I would be the last one to accuse Hitler of not understanding the
role morale, influence and other psychological factors played as can be seen by his willingness to invest so much in a land based siege of Leningrad
when a naval blockade were all that was required to protect his Iron ore, and other, shipments from Sweden. Exactly the same thing happened at
Stalingrad when again a siege would have been enough he wanted it captured or destroyed for just about the same reason... It is as you say surprising
that Hitler could not see that Moscow presented not only the easiest target for a true decapitation of the Soviet leadership but also THE pivotal rail
and industrial hub that made European Russia defensible.
It seems to me that Hitler believed that he needed to inflict massive casualties on the Soviet army, preventing them from falling back in good order
to defend central and Asiatic Russia, and when the Soviet army did stand and fight he saw his chance to destroy their field armies in the first season
leaving Moscow as easy prize to be taken at his leisure. Perhaps Hitlers only real mistake was in underestimating how fast the Soviet losses could and
would be made good in the late summer and fall of 41' and in hoping for a regular winter instead of the coldest one in decades that he got. Fact is
even with Hitlers diversion of panzer's South had the summer been a regular one there is good reason to believe that Moscow might still have been
captured and destroyed as rail hub.
Secondly,Germany had many potential "ready made" allies within the Soviet Union who would have willingly joined them to fight against Stalin's
represive rule,i.e Ukraine and the Baltic states,had Germany held back the SS from terrorising these peoples,and nurtured and supported them
instead,the Wermacht would have had the potential to deploy these "friendly nations" to guard their rearmost flanks as they headed for
Absolutely but we all know that it was in the Nazi regimes blood and that they were simply not going to pass up the chance to exterminate their
ideological 'enemies'. It was clearly not in the the thousand year Reich's interest to start the culling so soon ( first win the war, right?) but it
seems they wanted the Slavs dead so badly that waiting another few years was just too long.
Thirdly,If Army group South had not let themselves become embroiled in Stalingrad and simply ignored it and headed for their originally
planned objective,the oilfields of Azerbaijan,they would have secured an invaluable fuel source outwith the German and Romanian based oil and
synthetic fuel plants which were of course vulnerable to allied air attack.
What doomed army group South was the decision to split it for the summer campaign into army group A with the strongest tank elements, to pursue the
capture of the oil fields in the Caucasus, and army group B to protect it's Northern flank. The mistake was in allowing the relatively weak army group
B to become embroiled in the siege of Stalingrad when it lacked the means to accomplish both missions. Having said that there really wasn't much on
the map to actually defend Stalingrad with so Hitler thought that it should be easy to take... Hard to know who to blame for eventually losing
practically a entire fronts worth of troops over a city that was by all rights originally defenseless... The question should perhaps rather be if it
would not have simpler to just take Moscow instead of risking so much to gain resources that might eventually allow for the same...
Having neutralised the Soviet Union and taken control of Soviet manufacturing facilities,Germany could have taken the time to build up a
fearsome land and air force which could have made an allied landing in Normandy virtually impossible,
A neutralised Soviet Union would have meant that Japan could have moved into China in real force or a serious effort against British India.... The
implications for Britain is obviously dire as the Med would have soon become impassable with Egypt and British oil soon in German hands.
Either way the Nazi's could have still 'won' the war in 1942 or at least kept the initiative in the East in 43. Without the massive German losses of
Stalingrad and the ensuing late summer defeats in 43' the Invasion of France in 44 would have been all but doomed to failure.
edit on 19-1-2012 by StellarX because: Spelling/clarification